The second Amendment of our Constitution reads: “A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

It is essential to realize that “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms” means we ALL have the right to own guns. 

The fact that this inherent, essential, fundamental, primal, ancient, natural right to bear arms has been enshrined in the U.S. Constitution means that NO legislative body has the right to prohibit firearm possession.  Americans may all arm themselves for traditional lawful purposes. Furthermore, ALL prohibitive or restrictive regulations or laws created by any state or local governments are unconstitutional.

Anyone who debates this issue wrongly emphasizes the words “a well-regulated Militia”.  Clearly, to emphasize this clause wrongly interprets the Second Amendment and interprets that the focus of the Second Amendment was to protect our militias.[1]  Those holding this incorrect view also typically add the collaterally wrong interpretation that it does NOT mean that citizens have inherent individual rights to possess guns.   While I can understand this confusion, it is important to realize that this is simply confusion and wrong thinking which our U.S. Supreme Court has corrected in its June 26, 2008 decision District of Columbia v. Heller.  

In Heller, our Supreme Court affirmed that the Second Amendment protects our individual, natural, ancient rights to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes such as self-defense or hunting.  The Court also clarified that the prefatory clause about the “militia” was inserted as Antifederalists feared that the Federal Government would disarm people in order to disable our two militias, thus we wanted to protect our right to bear arms so as to protect our two militias.  The U.S. Supreme Court also pointed to the history and tradition of the Second Amendment at the time of the Constitutional Convention, i.e., there were many individual arms-bearing rights in State constitutions both before and after the U.S. Constitution was drafted.

Given these facts and our inherent, natural, Constitutionally-guaranteed rights to bear arms, what must be done in Florida to correct our previous unlawful, un-Constitutional decision making?

Recognize that the Parkland bill created 2 wrongs which legislators must correct:  

(1) it unlawfully restricted the rights of those 18-21 years of age from bearing arms and it 

(2) created un-necessary, illegal restrictions on gun ownership when it redefined one of the background check statuses that unjustifiably restricted some potential gun owners for an indefinite period of time. 

Legislators must determine how to correct these 2 Parkland wrongs and return Floridian’s Constitutional rights to bear arms to us.

Another issue that I would very much like the legislature to address is the Department of Agriculture’s CWL permit process.  I have personally experienced the fact that the DOA’s system is awkward, time-consuming, cumbersome, inefficient and wastes staff time when I applied for my own CWL permit.  Legislative oversight is a huge role for a Representative.  I will insist that the CWL permit process is either vastly improved or removed from the DOA.

How do I differ from the incumbent on these issues?  The incumbent: 

(1) wrongly voted FOR Parkland.  

(2) later, the incumbent stated that he made a mistake and that he would reverse Parkland but has not made any efforts toward doing so.

(3) his position on Department of Agriculture control of CWL permits is not clear to me as I have not heard his comments or observed his actions on this topic.

[1] It is important to note that the Florida Statutes in 250.02(1)-(4) define two militias.  

(1) Florida’s unorganized militia “consists of all able-bodied citizens of this state and all other able-bodied persons who have declared their intention to become citizens, who are subject to military duty but who are not members of units of the organized militia”.

(2) Florida’s organized militia is “composed of the National Guard and any other organized military forces that are authorized by law”.

2 Replies to “GUN CONTROL

  • Thomas long

    By Thomas long


    Okay nice to see you have read and made an interpretation of the 2nd of the U.S. Constitution. I agree with your interpretation of it. Now as a state Rep how are you going to fix state law. The two Parkland errors are a good start. The State need to decide who should control the CWL (which violates the Federal 2nd amendment). Who has oversight of the process. Personally if we go the route of Constitutional Carry it will make this process much easier. What is the plan for the hearing protection act for Floridians? Plus many other hot topics for the Second Amendment crowd?

  • Marcie Adkins

    By Marcie Adkins


    I hope that you realize for me to be specific as to “how I am going to fix state law” would be arrogant, presumptuous and a great way for me to make enemies.

    I am old enough (60 years of age) and have enough experience to know that for me to announce a specific legislative agenda at this point in time would be boastful. When I am elected, I need to get to Tallahassee and figure this all out, figure out exactly who voted for and against each and every gun control bill overtime, figure out who my friends are and are not, etc. That is a lot of work. After doing all that work and talking in detail with the gun lobby, I can actually make a legislative plan.

    Right now, all I can do is just tell you who I am. If you read beyond this blog and read my biography and all the other blogs, you can start to see me. I am trying to do my best.

    So, sorry, Thomas. I really can’t be more specific. To do so would be shooting myself in the foot…..

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *